Observations and reflections from Tibor R. Machan, professor of business ethics and writer on general and political philosophy, now teaching at Chapman University in Orange, CA.

Thursday, May 25, 2006

Column on Demeaning Libertarianism

Demeaning Libertarianism in Academe

Tibor R. Machan

In a new reader in business ethics that?s just been sent to me by thepublisher, Honest Work (Oxford University Press, 2007!)?so I might considerusing it in my business ethics courses?the editors include a final ?case?about ?Roberto, a pure libertarian in moral and political philosophy,? whodecides to enter the cocaine trade as ?a pure form of the free market inwhich supply and demand control transactions. This fact about the businessappeals to Roberto, as it seems perfectly suited to his libertarian views.?

Now to start with, libertarianism is not a moral but only a politicalphilosophy or theory. That is to say, it proposes an answer to thequestion ?How ought human communities to be organized, what laws shouldgovern them,? not to the question, ?How ought one to live his life, whatare standards of right and wrong conduct.?

Once this is appreciated, the attempt at besmirchinglibertarianism inthis final, concluding piece of this new text book becomes evident: theauthors of this imaginary case, supposedly based on ?accounts in The WallStreet Journal and The Economist? (without a clue as to where thoseaccounts could be located)?Professors Tom Beauchamp, Jeff Greene, andSasha Lyuste?conflate the moral (or ethical) issue of whether tradingcocaine (and, by implications, any other hazardous items) is ethical withwhether there ought to be government regulations and bans controlling suchtrade.

Let?s go back for a moment to those Danish cartoons to see thedifference. It is one thing to defend the right of the editors of thepapers that published them; it is another thing to defend the journalisticethics of publishing those cartoons or, indeed, anything else offensiveand insulting in various publications, from magazines, newspapers, books,and the media in general. Obviously, even if one is wrong to publishsomething, one can have the right to do so?many, for example, defend thebasic right of Larry Flynt to publish Hustler?s magazine, a filthy glossyrag that?s a frontal insult upon women?s bodies, without defending themorality of his doing so. In the case of freedom of speech and religion,there is no confusion like this other than by some fundamentalists aroundthe globe. One can have the right to do what is wrong.

Roberto?s entering the cocaine trade may very well be wrong.Libertarianism as such, as a political theory, does not address thatissue, just as it does not address whether Roman Catholicism or Judaism orIslam is a faith to embrace, but it does address whether the rights ofadult men and women to enter that trade ought to be respected andprotected. Since, of course, there is plenty of agreement on other frontsabout the merits of the basic rights to life and liberty, attacking themwould be bad strategy. Instead it is smarter to make it appear thatlibertarianism not only defends these rights but also endorses the ethicsof entering cocaine trade, as if it not only defended the right to freedomof speech but also whatever those who exercise this right actually say.

The business ethics industry is, of course, full of such smear efforts.If you defend free markets, oppose government regulations, or championglobal free trade, then you need to be shown as an promoter of immorality.Never mind that this is a complete non-sequitur. It is very sad thatbusinessethics students across the country will have such a smear effort peddledto them by well credentialed professors in books published by the mostprestigious publisher in the world.

In my own history of teaching business ethics, I have encountered suchefforts everywhere?I have called it business bashing, because it mainlyinvolves besmirching, belittling the profession of business and commerceitself, presenting these as amoral?morally indifferent, callous?endeavorsthat then need to be tamed by governments, by those paragons of virtueacross the globe, politicians and bureaucrats.

Go figure.-----------------Machan is RC Hoiles Professor of business ethics & free enterprise at theArgyros School of Business & Economics, Chapman University, and a researchfellow at the Hoover Institution, Stanford University.